Originally Posted by Bun
bad luck to them then.
people preceding 1860 didn't get to play a single test match either.
Nah, 40 fifty plus scores is very high for a cut-off point for a sample size even for some of the recent players. Likes of Hussey-Pietersen-De Villiers-Dilshan-Amla-Gambhir-Kohli-etc hasn't yet achieved that, although they're good-to-great ODI batsmen already.
'Minimum sample size to be judged' and 'minimum sample size to gain some points for longevity' are different points. We can say that Hussey or Pietersen aren't as great ODI batsmen as Ponting because Ponting has played much more, but we can't say that Hussey or Pietersen can't be judged on the basis of their ODI performances because they haven't played enough (which surely they have). These are two different things.
And let's not bring Abbas and other previous years' greats into the debate, because that's the subject matter of a different debate - whether to measure longevity by no. of matches or by no. of years...